This Week in Baseball 8/11 - 8/17

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

The problem is that some calls directly influence other action on the field. One of the most controversial calls in history occurred in the 1980 NLCS. With runners on first and second, Gary Maddox hit a low liner to the pitcher. Was it caught or was it trapped? The runners saw the umpire signal a trap, it was ruled a catch. The correct call determines what the runners do, what the fielders do, who is in jeopardy on the basepaths.

 

The fair/foul home run is one of the few situations that does not encounter this problem. The problem though is that it happens so infrequently that it is hardly worth the effort and expense.

 

For the record, if total instant replay where imposed I would demand a replay of the '77 NLCS. Starting at game four with the Phillies LEADING the series 2-1. Davey Lopes was out, damnit.

 

 

Wait are you saying you don't want replay because it could affect a baserunner? What a fucking lame excuse.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Wait are you saying you don't want replay because it could affect a baserunner? What a fucking lame excuse.

 

Trying to come up with a good example here. Let's say runners first and second. Batter hits a liner to the outfield. The fielder makes a play, the umpire rules it an out, the runners scuttle back to their bases. But the play is challenged, replay shows the ball bounced on the field first. What happens? The runners at this point are in jeopardy. You can't just award them the next base, that's not in the rules. You can't give the ball to the right fielder, restart the play and give him a shot at an out on the bases.

 

Seriously, what happens in that situation?

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

I suppose the umpires would have to award them the bases that they think they would've reached on the play, wouldn't they? Of course it's not in the rules; there's no precedent for reversing a call because you went back and checked the tape. If this is something we can't overcome, then I guess we're forever doomed to bad calls and reminding ourselves that they'll all even out in the end, unless you're the Chicago White Sox and your announcers, players, and managers routinely claim some sort of umpiring conspiracy against your team as part of your marketing plan, but perhaps I've said too much.

 

To revisit my earlier point: do you guys feel like we've reached the end of a long crescendo of outcry for instant replay, or did this all seem quite rushed to anybody else?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Wait are you saying you don't want replay because it could affect a baserunner? What a fucking lame excuse.

 

Trying to come up with a good example here. Let's say runners first and second. Batter hits a liner to the outfield. The fielder makes a play, the umpire rules it an out, the runners scuttle back to their bases. But the play is challenged, replay shows the ball bounced on the field first. What happens? The runners at this point are in jeopardy. You can't just award them the next base, that's not in the rules. You can't give the ball to the right fielder, restart the play and give him a shot at an out on the bases.

 

Seriously, what happens in that situation?

 

If the baserunners reached base safely, I'd say re-award them the bases. Simple.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

I suppose the umpires would have to award them the bases that they think they would've reached on the play, wouldn't they? Of course it's not in the rules; there's no precedent for reversing a call because you went back and checked the tape. If this is something we can't overcome, then I guess we're forever doomed to bad calls and reminding ourselves that they'll all even out in the end, unless you're the Chicago White Sox and your announcers, players, and managers routinely claim some sort of umpiring conspiracy against your team as part of your marketing plan, but perhaps I've said too much.

 

To revisit my earlier point: do you guys feel like we've reached the end of a long crescendo of outcry for instant replay, or did this all seem quite rushed to anybody else?

I think it would have come about before, but it is only now that the technology has really developed to a point where it is feasible from a technical standpoint. I think that is why the idea has really developed traction this time. It used to be that the media would simply call for Don Denkinger's head on a pike. I don't think MLB is truly responsive to the idea. They are using it in the least obstructive manner possible, with the least outlay of manpower possible.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Wait are you saying you don't want replay because it could affect a baserunner? What a fucking lame excuse.

 

Trying to come up with a good example here. Let's say runners first and second. Batter hits a liner to the outfield. The fielder makes a play, the umpire rules it an out, the runners scuttle back to their bases. But the play is challenged, replay shows the ball bounced on the field first. What happens? The runners at this point are in jeopardy. You can't just award them the next base, that's not in the rules. You can't give the ball to the right fielder, restart the play and give him a shot at an out on the bases.

 

Seriously, what happens in that situation?

 

If the baserunners reached base safely, I'd say re-award them the bases. Simple.

They didn't. They turned back when the umpire signaled catch.

[Mike wanna be 0]

Wait are you saying you don't want replay because it could affect a baserunner? What a fucking lame excuse.

 

Trying to come up with a good example here. Let's say runners first and second. Batter hits a liner to the outfield. The fielder makes a play, the umpire rules it an out, the runners scuttle back to their bases. But the play is challenged, replay shows the ball bounced on the field first. What happens? The runners at this point are in jeopardy. You can't just award them the next base, that's not in the rules. You can't give the ball to the right fielder, restart the play and give him a shot at an out on the bases.

 

Seriously, what happens in that situation?

 

If the baserunners reached base safely, I'd say re-award them the bases. Simple.

...but they didn't reach any base safely, they probably stopped somewhere short of second and third respectively, and then hauled back to first and second respectively upon the "catch" ruling.

 

If he traps that ball "upon further review", does the guy headed to third round third and head home? Does he make it? Does the guy on first head to third if the runner ahead of him heads home? Does the batter head to second if the previous two runners advance? Does the outfielder throw home, does the cutoff man intercept it, does the cutoff man redirect the throw to first, second or third, are any of these throws wild, do any of the fielders making catches make errors instead?

 

This is why you limit MLB instant replay to stuff you can actually undo.

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Ok in that case you'd have to change the rules in accordance to the introduction of the instant replay.

[Dandy 0]

I don't see why they couldn't add timing plays or tags to the equation rather easily.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

They possibly could, but what's the point? Are we really so worked up over a few missed calls that we need to double-check every single call in the ballgame?

[Dandy 0]

No, but if they are going to institute replay for fair/foul calls, why not show plays at the plate or bang-bang plays, which happen way more often and usually get us ranting more often when it screws our team?

[Guest WhackingCockDick]

They possibly could, but what's the point? Are we really so worked up over a few missed calls that we need to double-check every single call in the ballgame?

We're upset that baseball is loudly taking steps to get certain calls 100% right while neglecting to afford the same attention to detail throughout, subjecting the rest of the game to the errors and caprices of that day's umpiring crew. Do it right or don't do it at all. I can't remember once getting frustrated with a bad home run call. I've been frustrated when they've been hit onto the streets, but never because it was miscalled. On the other hand, there's no shortage of times when I've felt the strike zone was expanding and contracting from pitch to pitch, or that safe was called out, or out was called safe. So please, somebody adequately answer this, why is the outcry limited to the least frequently occurring officiating error?

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

They possibly could, but what's the point? Are we really so worked up over a few missed calls that we need to double-check every single call in the ballgame?

 

You're right. There is absolutely no point in making sure we get the right calls. That was so crazy of me to even think of it.

 

[Bruiser Chong 0]

Porter sure has been touchy/irritable lately.

[LuckyLopez 0]

So please, somebody adequately answer this, why is the outcry limited to the least frequently occurring officiating error?

Because its the easiest to do without rewriting the rulebooks, disrupting things greatly, extending the game, and causing lots of debate and controversy. Its a small fix because its the easiest to do. They don't have to worry about those question of how to handle baserunners, how many bases would have advanced, what can and can't be reviewed, and everything else that would come up. They can just introduce this mid season and have it right immediately. Because a HR being reversed into a foul doesn't cause any extra questions that need to be answered.

 

If it works maybe this offseason they look into those more complicated cases that impact a game more often. Or maybe they decide that its just too big a project to undertake and would cause more trouble than its worth. Either way, they stopped HR calls that get blown from affecting a game. So that's an improvement.

[strummer 0]

The Mets should be forbidden to play early Monday afternoon games against the Pirates.

 

2 excruciating losses a week apart

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

Porter sure has been touchy/irritable lately.

 

My apologies.